When the "world" understands the bible?? and Devine Design....

 

Ok..... count how many outfits would be considered modest.

Modest meaning, Thighs covered, full chest covered, back covered, shoulder's covered.

Sure sure sure, off and on a person will wear a cross necklace (but I know they may or may not have bible understanding or beliefs??)

Tall-ness is a "desirable" trait in humanity? Thin is good..... this is what the fashion industry teaches in a large scale.

Notice how the facial features differ from one another.

Are all churches accepting of the "differences" in the human design.  Meaning, is there TRUE diversity in the church? 

Models are desirably tall and thin.  HOWEVER, I have heard of disabled models.  Even DOWN-SYNDROME models.

Isn't Jesus a "model" for humanity to follow?  Why does the "world" have to teach us how to model ethical behaviour?  What if the worldly models displayed children in the shoot, and they showed family with multi-ethnic family structure.  The "institutional" church is behind schedule.  It is missing the train  of reality.

Think about it for a bit.

Political scams occur left and right.  Sure Donald T. is married to a model.  Some of her appearances have been immodest and inappropriate.  But real people exist in USA.  Mixed race conditions??? etc.

Tall and thin is a genetic trait too?  Michelle O. modeled a more "realistic" apparel that is common to average woman.  Is there some sort of competition I am supposed to figure out in this world, that doesn't even really exist?  I don't get it.  Eve and the garden at it again.

A woman cannot change her height (unless there is hormonal disorder).  A woman cannot change her ancestry (this is not even considered as blood carries the traits and DNA patterns).  Weight and frame?  It will depend on the genetics and lifestyle chosen.  What about maternity conditions?  Sure she can CHOOSE (so long as she isn't abused) to avoid a pregnancy in the first place  without natural remedy or pharmaceuticals: Don't touch a man at certain times of the life-giving cycle.  Will pregnancy produce a body structure that creates heavy un-fit weight?  No.  In fact, it can do the opposite and ENHANCE the fit-status of a woman's body. Example: I was at "taylor swift" size after a couple of pregnancy, and am at "paris hilton" height.  

Yes, I've grown up around Amish Mennonite communities.  I agree with the modesty standards, but sometimes I don't think it is "real" for all families to fit THEIR version of human conditions.  Meaning many of the groups are ONLY white skin-tone people.  Children often look super similar to the parents and grandparents and even great grandparents (no ancestry differences).  They are also generally pro-life except for cases of maternity problems (a major life-threatening issue to the woman's body).  Clothing attire?  You know a person who wears modest clothing, that is somewhat low key and not formal, is still a person wearing modest clothing.  They are not rebelling against anything.  Be it culture attire (like Kimono) or not.

Things to think about and why I use "people images and videos" in my posts.  Jesus' clothing?  I'm sure he wore something on the robe perspective with sack-cloth looking apparel, not so much of the fancy robes of Pontius Pilot and Harrod.  The images from "religious" churches of Europe portray "white" but Jesus is Jewish inside and out as well as disciples.....consider multiple skin tones with perhaps a nose feature???  I wouldn't know the FULL ancestry features of all his ancestors....maybe a bit of all the different ancestry features from the area (afro-asiatic).  Physical appearance (there are videos out there on the topic left and right leaning and multitudes)

By the way, gluttony is considered sin.....but the church doesn't address this issue.  It only addresses that the tall-skiny women who have "failed" pregnancy are the bad people in the story line.  But what about Bathsheba?  Tell me more.  A failed pregnancy doesn't mean "pro-choice" or even reliance on "planned parenthood."  Midwifery has been around since Exodus 1-2.  The institutional church needs to wake up out of its sleepy mixture of mud and indifference to the reality at hand.  When the church is political, it looses its savor.  Be like Ruth and Esther....not like Jezabel and Herod's wife.  Esther of the bible is considered a "fair" woman.  Its just the REALITY of what the bible describes.

What about "models" in nature?  Are they superior to human models?  One would think as men fail miserably at times, but human models are necessary (many biblical illustrations)

Christmas trees/Evergreen Trees?  Used to symbolize looking up to the heavens in the dark of winter.  LIFE in the middle of the "dead" winter when the trees are skeletons.  Fall Weather?  Change of heart...changing seasons, changing leaf color.  Maybe a change in ancestry background from one to another (following what I am saying maybe the Moabites looked different in some way, hence the book of Ruth)  Man didn't design these elements of nature.  the elements of seasonal change.  Man can only decide to change his heart like the book of Esther (the king changed his heart when he discovered reality.).